Subscribe To

Saturday, 31 January 2015

A
calm SYRIZA and Greece said “no” to debt talks with EU-IMF
troika.

Peter
Iiskola, via Facebook

The
new finance minister of Greece Yanis Varoufakis bravely opened in
Athens the Pandora’s Box for the Eurozone and euro-dollar system.
With just a simple “no” to the EU-IMF troika Greece is now on the
way out from the Eurozone. Greece refuses to discuss the “toxic and
anti-European” austerity and bailout conditions with the "troika",
the combined euro-dollar team, but can talk with Eurozone leaders.

Varoufakis
said that Greece does not need in the end of February another € 7
Billion tranche from the “troika” as bailout money.

His
message was clear on Friday during a very chilly and short meeting
with the Dutch finance minister Jeroen Dijsselbloem, who represented
the troika, and walked quickly and silently out from the press
conference after Varoufakis said “no”.

Instead,
Greece want to discuss directly only with Eurozone leaders (read:
Merkel and Germany), but observers say that Germany will not
compromise. So, Greece goes out from the Eurozone.

This
means that Greece might start again to print its own money (drachma),
get financing e.g. from BRICS and Russia, while the PIGS (Portugal,
Italy, Greece, Spain) plus Ireland might be tempted to follow the
example of Greece and abandon the Eurozone.

Out
from this Greek Pandora’s box might also sail a “Black Swan”
(the impossible thing, until it happens) or a beginning for a
financial meltdown for the Eurozone or the Western euro-dollar based
EU-IMF system, if many others will follow the Greek escape. The
financially mighty BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, China, India and
South Africa) are already sailing away and have established an own
BRICS Bank.

The
EU-IMF Troika and Greece has a completely different policy, body
language and dress code. Djisselloem was symbolically like the
stone-faced funeral entrepreneur dressed in a dark suit, tie and
white shirt. But Varoufakis was smiling and dressed in a very casual
open turquoise shirt.

This
will certainly increase the appetite for the PIGS (Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain) plus Ireland to look for escape routes from
the austerity in the Eurozone - and the euro-dollar system. The PIGS
might also want to print its own money and find alternative
financing. Perhaps the new BRICS bank and/or Russia will give a
helping hand to the PIGS. Certainly, it will also increase the
appetite for Great Britain to take the final step out from the
European Union, as the most likely next Prime Minister Nigel Farage
has been a stron advocate for.

Greece
is - like the PIGS countries - under a heavy and “toxic”
austerity program imposed by the previous governments and the
“troika”. But the new Greek government with Alexis Tsipras will
put an end for this. Greece owes € 320 Billion and in this sum is
included a bailout of € 240 Billion in 2010 from the “troika”
the European Commission, International Monetary Fund (IMF) and
European Central Bank (ECB).

Opinion: 10
reasons you don’t hear the Doomsday Clock ticking

The
Doomsday Clock was just reset: It’s now “Three Minutes to
Midnight,” warns the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists. It’s loud
ticking is a grim reminder, as Joe Romm put it on ClimateProgress,
that “Earth’s rate of global warming is 400,000 Hiroshima bombs a
day.” Yes, a civilization-ender, and yet, Gallup polls dismiss the
warning — the public doesn’t consider climate change a major
national priority.

The
threat was also summarized in Scientific American: The Doomsday Clock
is “a visual metaphor to warn the public about how close the world
is to a potentially civilization-ending catastrophe. Experts on the
board said they felt a sense of urgency this year because of the
world’s ongoing addiction to fossil fuels, procrastination with
enacting laws to cut greenhouse-gas emissions and slow efforts to get
rid of nuclear weapons.”

Yes,
global warming is as powerful and lethal as 400,000 atomic bombs
exploding daily, said James Hansen, former head of NASA Goddard
Institute of Space Studies.

America
is addicted to Big Oil. But paradoxically, that’s numbing us to the
terminal ticking sound of the disasters ahead. Our brains are trapped
in denial — not just Big Oil and their right-wing climate-science
deniers — but more than 100 million average Americans. We’re
deaf. Dumb. Blind. To the threats.

This
is a problem of psychology, behavioral economics and the
neurosciences. As anthropologist Jared Diamond, author of “Collapse:
How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed,” put it: Our brains still
haven’t learned the lessons of history. Remember, centuries ago two
million people lived in the Mayan civilization. But like “so many
societies the elite made decisions that were good for themselves in
the short run and ruined themselves and societies in the long run.”

As
a result, the Mayan civilization collapsed “because of a
combination of climate change, drought, water-management problems,
soil erosion, deforestation.” Diamond added the rulers “managed
to insulate themselves from the consequences of their actions.”
Forests being chopped down. But “the kings didn’t recognize that
they were making a mess until it was too late.”

Flash
forward, “similarly, in the United States at present, the policies
being pursued by too many wealthy people and decision makers are ones
that, as in the case of the Mayan kings, preserve their interests in
the short run but are disastrous in the long run.”

Yes,
today the old pattern is repeating. Listen to 10 excuses Americans
make. All of us, not just Big Oil but all across America, Washington,
Wall Street, and yes, all over Main Street. Here’s why we are
already repeating the same fate as the Mayans in today’s world of
endless hypocrisy and denials about global warming, failing to
prepare, oblivious of the coming storms. We are self-destructing our
civilization and our planet with nonsense rationalizations like
these:

1.
Climate costs must be balanced against jobs and the economy

This
is Big Oil’s biggest argument. In fact, the only “jobs and
economy” the oil industry cares about are their own hundreds of
thousands of jobs, over $100 billion in annual profits and trillions
in revenues the last decade. Diamond warns: environmental solutions
are not a “luxury” with just a cash outflow. “This puts the
truth exactly backwards. ... Environmental messes cost us huge sums
of money both in the short run and in the long run” and “cleaning
up or preventing those messes saves us huge sums in the long run, and
often in the short run as well.”

2
. Technology will solve all our climate problems

In
Robert Gordon’s provocative National Bureau of Economic Research
paper, “Is U.S. economic growth over?” we learn that not only is
America’s GDP dropping to under 1% by 2100, Silicon Valley
innovations and new technologies will not trigger a new Industrial
Revolution reversing the trajectory of this future. “This faith in
the future is based on an unsubstantiated track record that
technology has solved more problems than it created, and will solve
existing problems without creating new problems,” says Diamond.
“Actual experience is the opposite.”

3.
If you exhaust one resource, just switch to another that works as
well

Jeremy
Grantham’s GMO firm manages $120 billion, warns that “We’re
running out completely of potassium (potash) and phosphorus
(phosphates), both essential in food production, and eroding our
soils.” Worse, Grantham’s research indicates they “cannot be
manufactured and cannot be substituted for.” Total depletion will
make it impossible to feed the 10 billion people predicted on the
planet by 2050.

4.
We just need more genetically modified crops and better distribution
to get food where needed

Diamond
says “this argument misses in two ways: That First World countries
do or can produce more food than their citizens consume. And surplus
First World food could be exported to the Third World.” And that
will “alleviate starvation.” Bad assumptions: Rich nations have
large poverty too. Plus we know China and the Saudis are already
buying and hoarding millions of acres of land in poor countries.
Distribution is not a problem, greed and the politics of inequality
is.

5.
Improvements in life span, health, and per capita wealth prove life
on Earth has been getting better for decades

Yes,
“for affluent First World citizens,” says Diamond. Plus
public-health advances have “increased life spans in the Third
World. But life span is not a sufficient indicator: billions of Third
World citizens, about 80% of the world’s population” still
survive on a few dollars a day. And as Nobel economist Joseph
Stiglitz, author of “The Price of Inequality,” put it: “There
is less equality of opportunity in the United States today than in
almost any advanced industrial country.” The inequality gap’s
widening, the top 1% captured 93% of the income growth since 2008.

Yes,
some predictions by environmentalists proved incorrect. But it’s
“misleading to look selectively for environmentalist predictions
that proved right, or anti-environmentalist predictions that proved
wrong.” The world is headed for an increasing frequency and
intensity of climate disasters. The recent 166 mph supertyphoon in
the Philippines was the largest ever recorded, leaving 1.5 million
homeless.

7.
The population crisis is solving itself

Critics
dismiss overpopulation by arguing that “the rate of increase of the
world’s population is decreasing,” meaning that “world
population will level off at less than double its present level.”
But Diamond warns that “even if it does, the world’s present
population is already living at a non-sustainable level ... the
bigger danger is the increase in human ‘impact’ as the Third
World achieves First World living standards.” Why? Developed
nations consume 32 times more resources, dump 32 times more waste
than do undeveloped nations.

8.
Planet Earth can easily handle infinite population growth

This
one is dumb and dumber: Assumes population growth will continue
forever. Diamond says it “can’t be taken seriously.” This myth
is perpetuated by our misguided economics profession as the
justification for the excesses of capitalism. Today the economy is
choking on this myth that’s being challenged by critics,
contrarians, environmentalists, ecologists and billionaires and
power-players like Tom Steyer, Hank Paulson and Michael Bloomberg.

9.
Climate-change concerns are the luxury of affluent First World
citizens who have no business lecturing desperate Third World
citizens

As
an anthropologist, Diamond has travelled to many Third World
countries, and documented their damaging environmental problems. What
he’s discovered is that the Third World is quite well aware of
global warming, climate change and the impact of environmental
disasters on their world. They know very well how they are being
harmed by population growth, deforestation, overfishing, and other
problems. And how globalism and giant corporations like Exxon Mobil
are too often the culprits.

10.
If environmental problems get desperate, so what, it’ll happen
after I die, so I can’t take them seriously today

Big
Oil is narcissistic, focused on quarterly earnings. Meanwhile,
Diamond’s focused on 2050, the next generation: “Most or all of
these environmental problems will become acute within the lifetime of
young adults now alive. Our goal of helping the next generation enjoy
good lives 50 years from now. It makes no sense for us to do help our
own children, while simultaneously doing things undermining the world
in which our children will be living 50 years from now.”

Bottom
line: We won’t act till its too late, Big Oil and today’s
generation and their denial need to be shocked awake. The goal is to
“persuade investors, policy makers and the public that the
consequences of unchecked carbon emissions would eventually blow away
whatever short-term costs are involved in curbing the pollution.”

Some
8,000 Ukrainian troops are believed to be surrounded near the village
of Debaltsevo in Donbass, as militia units cut off the only road
linking the pocket to Kiev-held territory. The servicemen have been
offered the chance to surrender.

The
forces of the People’s Republic of Donetsk (DPR) have stormed and
captured the town of Uglegorsk, a stronghold of the Ukrainian army in
the east of the country used for communication and supply. It is
about 10 kilometers from Debaltsevo.

Ukrainian
MP and commander of the Donbass volunteer battalion Semyon
Semenchenko, says on his Facebook page that Uglegorsk has been
abandoned by Ukrainian forces. Semenchenko claimed that the rebels
attacked his unit from the rear.

Donetsk
People’s Republic head Aleksandr Zakharchenko says Uglegorsk was
captured in a violent“dawn-to-dusk
operation” and
offered enemy troops to surrender, promising to spare their live.

“Guys,
my proposal is to lay down arms and surrender. You’re fighting the
wrong people. You have the only chance to save your lives. Surrender
and you will live. I promise that all of you will return home
afterwards,” Zakharchenko
said.

Following
the offer, 11 Ukrainian soldiers have already “crossed
the DPR’s border” and
surrendered to the rebel forces. “Their
lives are not in danger,” DPR
Defense Ministry spokesperson Eduard Basurin said.

Meanwhile,
the Lugansk Republic’s forces are currently battling for the town
of Popasnaya, Basurin said.“If
the LPR militias capture Popasnaya and move towards Artemovsk –
there will be yet another pocket to the north of the one near
Debaltsevo,” he
warned.

Meanwhile,
Kiev authorities have reportedly empowered army commanders to gun
down deserters on the spot.

A
leaked document published on Cyber Berkut hacktivist website alleges
that Ukraine's Security Service has forbidden hospitals from
revealing the real losses on the battlefield.

The
Kiev authorities have called an emergency meeting of the cabinet on
Friday to discuss the situation in the east.

It
has been rapidly worsening since January 18, when Ukrainian
troops have launched a massive assault on militia-held
territories after an order from Kiev.

Kiev
authorities have revealed that since the beginning of the latest
draft as many as 10,000 Ukrainian servicemen are absent from their
posts.

"NATO
and the United States should change their policy because the time
when they dictate their conditions to the world has passed,"
Ahmadinejad said in a speech in Dushanbe, capital of the Central
Asian republic of Tajikistan

Ukraine
chief of staff ‘thwarts Western allegations’ by admitting no
combat with Russian troops

The
Ukraine army’s chief of staff has admitted that Kiev troops are not
engaged in combat with Russian units, thereby thwarting all Western
allegations of Moscow's “military invasion,” said Russian Defense
Ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov.

“Yesterday
afternoon the Chief of the General Staff – Chief of the Armed
Forces of Ukraine – Viktor Muzhenko officially acknowledged during
a briefing for foreign military attachées that Russian troops are
not involved in the fighting in the country's southeast,”
Konashenkov said on Friday.

Given
the fact that Muzhenko directly supervises military operations in the
southeast, “his
statement is a legal fact, which thwarts numerous accusations made by
NATO and Western states”
concerning Russia's alleged “military
invasion”
in Ukraine, the spokesman dded.

The
Russian Defense Ministry, however, was puzzled by a statement from
Muzhenko's subordinate, Sergey Galushko, made several hours later.
According to Galushko – an employee of the Department of
Information Technology – Russian troops are located in the
so-called “second
echelon.”

On
Thursday, Muzhenko said “the
Ukrainian army is not engaged in combat operations against Russian
units.”
He added, however, that he had information about Russian individuals
fighting in the country’s east. He also said the Ukrainian army has
everything it needs to drive off armed units in Donbass. His speech
was aired by Ukraine's Channel 5 television, owned by President Petro Poroshenko.

Commenting
on Muzhenko’s statement, Galushko said that reporters were only
allowed at the open part of the meeting. He said that later, during
the closed part, the chief of general staff said that Russian units
are “in the second tier.”

Muzhenko
himself did not elaborate on the initial statement.

Kiev
began a military assault on eastern Ukraine's Donetsk and Lugansk
regions in April 2014, after they refused to recognize the country’s
new, coup-imposed authorities. According to UN estimates, more than
5,000 people have died as a result of the conflict.

Since
the start of Kiev’s military operation, Ukraine and Western states
have repeatedly alleged that Russia has a military presence in the
country's east. Moscow has refuted those claims on multiple
occasions.

Russian
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov reiterated Moscow’s arguments on
Wednesday, calling on those who believe the opposite to prove their
point. “I
say it every time: if you are so sure in stating that, confirm it
with facts. But no one can or wants to provide them,” he
said.

The
Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) said it
has not registered any movement of military vehicles at the
Russia-Ukraine border checkpoints it observes, according to a
statement made on January 22.

Fighters
of the notorious paramilitary battalion Aidar have rallied in Kiev
against their disbandment, attempting to storm the Ukraine Defense
Ministry’s HQ and accusing the regular army of deliberately
shelling Aidar’s own positions with heavy artillery.

Ukraine’s
most infamous volunteer squad, the Aidar battalion – condemned by
Amnesty International for its unmatched brutality in eastern Ukraine
– allegedly came under Grad and Smerch rocket fire by the regular
military near the town of Schastya in Lugansk region.

“[Ukrainian]
artillery is working against Aidar battalion’s positions,” said
Aidar commander and MP representing Ukraine’s Radical Party, Sergey
Melnichuk, during a protest outside the Defense Ministry’s building
in Kiev. Citing his own fighter, Melnichuk claimed that Kiev’s
artillery targeted the battalion’s positions “15-20
times.”

Melnichuk
and his fighters called the rally outside the country’s military
headquarters on Friday, after the volunteer battalion was disbanded –
or "rebranded" –
according to the Defense Ministry.

“The
battalion was disbanded three days ago. It does not exist according
to documents. The Minister of Defense and the Head of the General
Staff say that they have not signed such an order. However, documents
confirming that such a unit does not exist as well as the seal of a
new unit have already been delivered to the frontline,” Melnichuk
told Apostrophe publication.

According
to the battalion’s press secretary, Yuliya Evdokimova, the
voluntary units are being disbanded“because
it is detrimental to have voluntary battalions at the frontline.” All
voluntary battalions will be “re-formatted into other
organizations, merged with other brigades or other units, and
thoroughly purged,” she told Ukrainian Pravda.

However,
the next day, the Facebook page of the battalion refuted the
disbandment of the fighting force, claiming that Evdokimova does not
represent the volunteer fighters.

The
confusion on the status of the battalion continued on Friday, as some
50 Aidar fighters rallied to show their
“under-appreciation” by
their own command. Formally, all volunteer territorial battalions are
detachments of Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense.

Melnichuk
said that his squad “will
not leave the frontline, no one will leave positions even if our own
will storm us, and we have such instances,” as
quoted by NTV channel.

Melnichuk
also claimed in an interview with Ukraine’s 112 channel that the
central military command might have “got
ahold of big funds” in
exchange for surrendering Schastya to the rebel forces. Melnichuk
claimed that when a similar deal was offered to him – $20 million
in exchange for Aidar leaving Schastya – he turned it down.

The
Defense Ministry in fact claimed the opposite, saying that the
volunteer force will be “strengthened”under
a new brand. The “rebranding” is
allegedly required to “prevent
abuse of the seal and documents that were previously lost and can
become an instrument of fraud...”

“To
perform essential tasks, Aidar battalion will be strengthened
further, and its soldiers equipped with everything they need,” the
statement read, adding that changes were only made to the official
seal of the unit, as its number designation has changed.

“Blocking
the Defense Ministry of a country at war, during the active battles
at the frontline – is treason,”he
said.

12:05

Trolleybus
comes under shelling in Donetsk, 5 killed - reports

A
trolleybus has come under shelling in Donetsk’s Matrosova Avenue,
TASS reported, citing a spokesman for the Emergencies Ministry of the
self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic. Five people in the
trolleybus were killed, officials in the republic say, according to
media. Initial reports said two people were killed.

The
representatives of the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Lugansk People’s
Republics, Denis Pushilin and Vladislav Deinego, said they were
planning to leave Minsk on Friday, Tass reported. Pushilin earlier
said that he was unaware if negotiations between the Contact Group on
Ukraine would take place in the Belarusian capital on Friday. A
senior Ukrainian Foreign Ministry official said that peace talks on
the conflict in eastern Ukraine must be attended by the leaders of
the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics.

The
self-proclaimed Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics are ready to
pull back heavy artillery from the line separating militia-held
territories from those under Kiev’s control in compliance with the
Minsk agreement, according to a joint statement made by top officials
of the republics on Friday. The statement said they will withdraw
weapons if Kiev is ready to do to the same, adding that the only
thing remaining is to “set the date.” The statement was made
during talks between Denis Pushilin and Vladislav Deynego, the
Donbass representatives at the Minsk negotiations. The Minsk document
adopted by Kiev and the opposition in September also includes a
ceasefire in eastern Ukraine.

Ukraine
envoy to UN saysRussia new humanitarian convoy will be regarded as
invasion

UNITED
NATIONS, January 30. /TASS/. Kiev will regard the dispatch of a new
motor convoy loaded with humanitarian aid to Ukraine as invasion,
Ukraine’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations Yury
Sergeyev said on Friday.

Cargoes
dispatched by Russia infiltrate Ukraine "without Kiev’s
permission," to speak nothing of "participation of the
International Committee of the Red Cross," Sergeyev said.

"If
a new convoy arrives, I think the twelfth, it will be regarded as
invasion," the Ukrainian diplomat said.

Earlier
in the day, the Russian Foreign Ministry announced that a next truck
convoy with relief aid for Donbass residents would set off for the
region on Saturday, January 31.

The
convoy comprising 176 vehicles, with 157 trucks out of them, is
expected to deliver nearly 1,500 tonnes of humanitarian cargoes,
mainly foodstuffs (920 tonnes) along with medications and fuel and
lubricants.

Russia’s
Emergencies Ministry organised eleven convoys with humanitarian aid
to Ukraine in co-operation with international and public
organisations from August 2014 to January 15, 2015, and delivered a
total of 14,800 tonnes of humanitarian cargoes to Ukraine’s Donetsk
and Lugansk regions.

It
was reported by the militiaman from the DPR. The militiaman from the
DPR Evgeniy Kryzhin was at positions in Enakievo, he reported about
this on his page in Facebook. ‘Uglegorsk is ours. It was stormed by
militias from our squadron also. 2 militias were wounded’, wrote
he.

How
it was earlier reported, the reinforcement of fighters from Azov
arrived to Ukrainian occupants.

According
to the dates of fire-fights have been going on, the Army of the DPR
finished the cleaning up.

I
don’t know who exactly (Turchinov? Poroshenko?) commanded the
Ukrainian army to disrupt the truce. But I am sure that this decision
was taken in Washington.

It
is not an accident that this suicidal provocation was preceded by the
visit of G. Soros to Kiev. This elderly “philanthropist” who,
together with the US Department of State, sponsored all post-soviet
fascist regimes (from Saakashvili’s Georgia to Poroshenko’s
Ukraine), was most qualified to assess the financial state of the
regime in Kiev and to decide whether it still makes sense to continue
prolongation of the agony by monetary injections. His public
statement, reprinted by media on January 14, left no doubt - the
patient is dead, the corpse is stiff, its resuscitation is
meaningless.

Surely,
Kiev has understood that if they scrape the bottom of the barrel and
if Europe exerts itself then it is possible to collect money for
further agony. But Soros clearly said about the necessity to find $50
billion just for 2015. While in 2014 (when the ignoramuses still
hoped for the stabilization of the Kiev regime) US, EU and IMF
together could scrape up only $20 billion, supposed to be stretched
over 3 years. In fact, in 2014 Kiev got only $7.5 – 8 billion in
credits. Clearly, in such conditions it is unrealistic to find $50
billion in a year. Soros himself told that he hopes only for a
miracle.

Right
after Soros’ unambiguous demand for the EU to finance Ukraine, the
European media coverage of the Ukrainian crisis changed drastically,
and it became clear that there will be no miracle. The European mass
media (including German TV) and NGO’s (including Human Rights
Watch) suddenly "saw the light" and found that the Kiev
regime is at war with civilians, violating the laws and customs of
war. Just a little bit longer and Europe will “realize” that Kiev
is taken by a fascist junta that tramples its own constitution, and
introduce sanctions against Russia for Kremlin’s economic
cooperation (supply of coal and gas) with the Nazi regime.

Europe
is not going to give money. USA are not going to help either (if they
wanted to do that, the IMF would not procrastinate for six months but
allocated tranche after tranche, instead). Under these conditions,
supporting Ukraine’s mythical stability, as Washington was doing
since the end of last summer, is absolutely meaningless. Back in
August-September of 2014, Ukrainian politicians were divided into two
groups: the majority – those who were ready to overthrow
Poroshenko, expecting to receive some dividends from the next coup,
and the minority taking a neutral position. Poroshenko himself had
neither his own support group nor power prop. He is still the
president only thanks to the US, which banned the coup at the time.

Washington
knew perfectly well that Poroshenko is trying to negotiate with
Moscow on the peaceful settlement (because only peace could give
Poroshenko a chance to protect not just his presidential chair, but
his life itself). United States needed a war and, seemingly, they did
not want to keep the frightened and confused Petro Alexeyevich at the
helm. But Americans were misled by Russian diplomacy. Peace was (and
remains) beneficial for Russia, because it forces the United States
and its European allies to keep the failed Ukrainian project alive
and, therefore, to spend their scarce resources. The Ukrainian coup,
intended to make from Kiev not only an eternal source of enmity
between Russia and the EU, but also a black hole devouring Moscow’s
resources, has not fulfilled any of its tasks -- a year after the
coup, Ukraine continues to devour the US resources.

But
since Ukraine is just one of many sites of global confrontation
between Moscow and Washington, the further concentration of efforts
on this site becomes unprofitable for the US. They cannot quit,
because then the site will be taken by Russia, which would be a
geopolitical defeat of Washington. Therefore, the site must be
destroyed. Let the winner occupy the ruins; if they could not
entangle him by the whole Ukraine, let he be entangled by the rotting
and decaying corpse of Ukraine.

So,
since for Russia it is better if Ukraine is destroyed by the US as
late as possible, the Russian diplomacy pretended for almost a year,
portraying weakness, confusion, and readiness to surrender. In
anticipation of the fall of Russia, which would solve all their
problems, the United States decided not to finish Ukraine. Why? If,
after the victory over Russia, the problem of supporting the Kiev
regime at the expense of Moscow would be solved by itself.

But
everything good comes to an end sooner or later. By the beginning of
December it became clear that Washington can push Russia as much as
it likes, but it cannot make Russia fall, without falling itself even
sooner. Taking into account the need to reduce the geopolitical
frontline, to concentrate resources on the remaining priority areas,
to leave the lost grounds, the question resurfaced again – what to
do with Ukraine? As soon as it became clear that Soros is not going
to find the necessary finances for Kiev, the fate of the country,
politicians, the public and even the “creative class” accustomed
to be immune to problems, was sealed. And the war reignited with
renewed ferocity.

US
knew perfectly well how unfit for action the Ukrainian army was and
how the armed forces of DPR/LPR have strengthened during the peaceful
respite. You don’t have to sit at the Chiefs of Staff Committee to
estimate from open sources that with such intensive fights, which
began on January 18th and continuing across the frontline, the
Ukrainian army will run out of strength to conduct active operations
in three to four weeks, and in one to three more weeks it will begin
to fall apart. By the way, the Ukrainian artillery will be the first
to disappear from the battlefield. Judging by the intensity and
dynamics of the artillery fire of the parties, the Ukrainian army was
behind DPR/LPR even on the volume of stored ammunition. While the
republics clearly had a constant resupply, the Ukrainian army could
not replenish consumable ammunition just as rapidly. After the
Ukrainian artillery lost the opportunity of equal fight with the
artillery of DPR/LPR, grinding of Ukrainian reserves was a matter of
short time, and after the exhaustion of reserves the collapse of the
front would became inevitable. Making up for the losses by means of
mobilization was impossible, even if they could mobilize everyone. In
the best case, the recruits would have been at the collection points,
when the front already collapsed.

Americans
knew all that, but still pushed the Ukrainian army into a senseless
attack, which could not even start in earnest. That is the army was
doomed to destruction and the front was destined to collapse. Why did
the United States need that? Because, as we mentioned above, the US
does not need the unattainable victory in Ukraine, they need the
destruction of Ukraine, but by someone else's hands and with the
greatest possible benefit for themselves.

Three
to four weeks of intense fighting would not only bleed the Ukrainian
army, but would also inflict substantial losses on the armed forces
of DPR/LPR. From the first days, the militia admits its own losses of
dozens if not hundreds killed and wounded, while noting that the
losses of the Ukrainian army are much higher. Let us not forget that
the armed forces of DPR/LPR currently do not exceed 30-40 thousand
soldiers, even by the most optimistic estimates. Taking into account
that 10-15 thousand are logistical and security units, there cannot
be more than 20-25 thousand of combat troops. This means that even
the loss of 3-5 thousand -- and this number of dead and wounded in
three to four weeks of intense fighting is quite possible --
dramatically reduces the combat capability of the militia forces.

So,
by the mid-late February the Ukrainian army would have to fall apart
and start a disorganized retreat, but the scarce militia forces,
having suffered serious losses, would be unable to take the territory
left by the withdrawing Ukrainian troops. This would create vast
power-vacuum areas between DPR/LNR and Kiev, where the militia and
some residual government troops would alternate to each other as in a
layered cake. To the extent that different streets of the same
locality could be held by different armed groups. In addition, while
the DPR/LPR armed forces are organized as more or less regular
structures with a unified chain of command, the army of Kiev keeps
sliding to irregular formations, which, with the death of the last
regular units, would finally transform to a bunch of Nazi gangs and
outright criminals partially diluted by completely kooky “veterans
of the anti-terrorist operation”.

In
this situation, Nazi battalions concentrated in the major cities of
the southeast in order to maintain the power in Kiev, will grow more
irritated and the Kiev propaganda will become more nervous. This
would increase the bitterness towards the power that "betrayed
us” as well as pro-Russian activists -- "the 5th column that
stabbed us in the back". Any pretext will be enough to inflame
the whole country. However, in order to paralyze the world community
and to disable its instantaneous and consistent reaction, the pretext
for the repeat of the Ruanda scenario (mutual senseless massacre)
must be beyond belief and, at the same time, radically change the
current political situation.

That
is, it is not enough to organize a loud act of terror or a series of
such acts on behalf of “pro-Russian partisans” or “FSB (GRU,
SVR) agents”. This provocation must move the Nazi community and
channel its efforts in the desired direction. Besides, the Ukrainian
government must be (or look) paralyzed. Finally, this event should be
sufficiently bloody, sufficiently immoral and touch those strata of
the society, which are perceived by the Nazis as their own. These
conditions cannot be satisfied with a single yet spectacular act of
terror (such problems cannot be solved even by an explosion at
Chernobyl).

Clearly,
first of all they would need death of a major political figure or
figures, so that allegedly (or really) paralyzed Ukrainian government
could not take measures to restore the order, even if it wanted to.
Poroshenko is a perfect sacral victim (especially because he is a
traitor to the Americans), but in place of the "young prodigy"
Yatsenyuk I would have not relaxed as well. After liquidation of
Ukraine, Yatsenyuk becomes useless and even dangerous as he can
testify to some sort of "International Tribunal for the Former
Ukraine." For a country without economy this symbolic economist
is just as useless as the great banker Yuschenko. Credits are not
coming with or without Yatsenyuk. To die heroically is the only
benefit that he can bring to the US. If someone blows up the
parliament during a plenary session with both Poroshenko and
Yatsenyuk in attendance, could you guess who will be declared guilty
even before any investigation? Especially if some "people's
avengers" would claim the responsibility afterwards?

Of
course, the Nazis from battalions spit on Poroshenko and Yatsenyuk,
but their battalion commanders will be there as well: Yarosh and
sotnik Parasyuk and cossack Gavrylyuk – it would be so indecent not
to avenge them. Moreover, if this seems not enough, they could carry
out a series of terrorist attacks in the hospitals where the "heroes
ATO" are treated. Imagine how barbaric killings of defenseless
"heroes" will be presented by the Ukrainian media. They
will not even need a training manual from the American Embassy; they
will interpret everything correctly by themselves.

Well,
and as "the cherry on the cake" one can explode the cascade
of the Dnieper hydropower plants. This would solve several US
problems at once. First, the real damage as a result of flooding will
not be as great, but cameras positioned in advance in the right
places will show pictures more terrible than during the tsunami in
Thailand, and "experts" (incidentally, also on their own
initiative) will immediately proclaim millions of potential victims.
Second, this will immediately cut off the left bank of the Dnieper
River from the right one. The dam will be blown, and bridges
destroyed. That is, the militia will not able to cross the Dnieper
without the help of the Russian Army. Third, if all this (from the
elimination of the political elite to the man-made technological
disasters) happens in three to five to ten days and if it becomes
possible (sure it does, otherwise, why are we feeding CIA?) to accuse
Russia and DPR/LPR of participation or at least of indirect
sponsorship of the terrorists, the consolidated international
community will not take quick control of Ukraine. Any participation
of Russia will be blocked by the West accusing Moscow of complicity
in the crime, but Western forces themselves could not stabilize the
situation (even if the US and the EU decided to act without a UN
resolution, they will not have the required operational capacity and
available troops). Fourth, while the US needs that, even Turchinov
can legitimately represent Kiev and lead the remnants of the
government, which is dispensable as well.

The
further course of events is also clear. The Nazis go to avenge their
“brothers in arms”. The battalions spread out across the country,
checking addresses from databases provided be fellow Nazis from the
SBU and parts of the Ministry of Interior. The militia will still be
able to quickly lend a helping hand to Kharkov, Left Bank districts
of Dnepropetrovsk and Zaporozhye, to punch a land corridor to the
Crimea. But without Russia’s help they cannot go further - there
are no bridges. Left bank guerrilla groups are stronger. Of course,
they will resist in Odessa, possibly even in Kiev, but the forces are
not equal. The mere fact of partisan resistance on the right bank
will deprive the junta of the support of the Ukrainian "creative
class". Nobody needs them in the US, because they cannot work,
but like to eat well. Nobody will feed them for their "Ukraineness"
(who needs Ukraineness without Ukraine?). Each of them doesn’t know
much, but taken together their testimonies would allow to piece
together the full picture. And if in the course of Ukrainian excesses
they will be killed in their own homes, so be it. "Tutsi"
kill "Hutu", "Hutu" kill "Tutsi" - this
is a sad feature of civil wars.

Thus,
pushing Ukraine from Somalization to Ruandization, the United States
are fully capable to minimize the effect of Russia’s victories,
cover the traces of their own crimes with blood and, most
importantly, make their participation in the coming settlement not
just necessary, but inevitable, thus preserving their positions on
the European continent and their control over the frightened EU.

We
considered just one scenario of the possible provocation that would
allow Washington to solve the problem of burning down the Ukrainian
stand. In fact, there are hundreds of similar scenarios. All of them
are real, and some of them must be already developed by the
Americans. Otherwise, the security services, the military and the
State Department are paid for nothing. The number of crimes already
committed by Washington and Kiev suggests that the above scenario is
not something extraordinary, on the contrary – it is well within
the logic of the previous actions. In February 2014, a hundred of
“Maidan” victims stimulated the coup; three hundred victims in
the downed "Boeing" allowed to deploy the summer offensive;
tens of thousands of killed Ukrainians serve as a means to pressure
Russia. Then how the tens of thousands of victims are different from
the hundreds of thousands or even millions? Only by the fact that the
US did not have the need to organize a mass human sacrifice in
Ukraine yet. Now there is such a need.

Two
things can still save people:

Ukrainian
executors’ traditional inability to implement even single American
plan;

Putin’s
traditional ability to come up with a decent way out of most
desperate situations.

But
these things are beyond the scope of rational analysis. They are
matters of luck.

Rostislav
Ischenko, president of the Center for system analysis and
forecasting, exclusively for the “Current Comments”.